N93-1G865

Applications of Living Systems Theoryto Life in Space*

James Grier Miller

Introduction

Earth, so far as we know, is the

only planet in our solar system on

which living systems have everexisted. Since Earth's primeval

atmosphere lacked free oxygenand therefore had no ozone layer

to protect primitive cells and

organisms from the Sun's killingradiation, life evolved in the sea for

the first two billion years. The

biological activity of primitive algaeis considered a major factor in

creating our oxygen atmosphere,

making it possible to colonize land.

Now the human species is

contemplating a second great

migration, this time into space.

Human settlements, first on spacestations in orbit and then on bases

on the Moon, Mars, and other

planetary bodies, are in the

planning stage.

Planning for nonterrestrial living

requires a reorientation of the long-

range strategic purposes and short-

range tactical goals .and objectives

of contemporary space programs.

The primary focus must be on thehuman beings who are to inhabit

the projected settlements. This

implies a shift in thinking by spacescientists and administrators so that

a satisfactory quality of human life

becomes as important as safety

during space travel and residence.Planners are challenged not only to

provide transportation, energy,food, and habitats but also to

develop social and ecological

systems that enhance human life.

Making people the dominantconsideration does not diminish

the need to attend to technologies

for taking spacefarers to their

new homes and providing aninfrastructure to sustain and

support them in what will almost

certainly be a harsh and stressful

setting (Connors, Harrison, and

Akins 1985).

As clear a vision as possible of

human organizations and

settlements in space and onnonterrestrial bodies in the

21 st century should be gained

now. A beginning was made bythe National Commission on Space

(1986) in depicting the humanfuture on the space frontier.

Behavioral scientists, particularly

those with a general systems

orientation, can contribute uniquely

to this process. They can do

research to improve strategic and

programmatic planning focused onhuman needs and behavior. The

results should prove to be the

drivers of the mechanical, physical,

and biological engineering required

to create the space infrastructure.

;-7F-

*Presentedat the NASA-NSF conference The Human Experience in Antarctica: Applications toLife in Space, held in Sunnyvale, CA, August 17, 1987.

231

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930007676 2018-07-20T20:10:13+00:00Z

Spacelab 1

As technicians examine the Spacelabmodule, a physician examines aprospective occupant. As wecontemplate long journeys to otherplanets and lengthy stays in space, wemust plan not only for the safetransportation and fife support ofspacefarers but also for their comfortand well-being. Thehighmotivation thathas characterized astronauts andcosmonauts in space flights so farcannot be expected to endureavoidable difficulties throughout tongmissions.

Artist: Charles Schmidt (NASA ArtProgram Collection)

232

When we envision nonterrestrial

stays of long duration, we must

plan for quite different social

phenomena than we have seen

in space missions up to now.

Astronauts have lived on space

stations for periods of a fewweeks or months at most. The

great majority of missions have

been relatively brief. Such

missions have required the daring

and initiative of carefully selected

and highly trained astronauts

equipped to accomplish limitedgoals. If people are to remain

permanently in settlements far from

Earth, however, they cannot endurethe inconvenient, uncomfortable,

and difficult working and livingconditions that have been the lot of

the highly trained and motivated

professionals who have gone into

space over the past 30 years.

Months and years in a space

environment are an entirelydifferent matter. Motivation

diminishes over time and long-continued discomforts are hard to

bear.

i

If men, women, and perhaps

even children live together innonterrestrial locations which, even

with excellent communications to

Earth, are inevitably isolating, their

behavior will undoubtedly be

different from any that has so farbeen observed in space. A new

space culture may well arise (see

Harris's paper on space culture inthis volume). This is particularly

likely in an international programthat includes people from differentnations and diverse cultures. It is

not too early to begin systematically

to try to understand what suchsettlements will be like in order

to plan wisely for them.

No place on Earth closely

resembles the conditions in space,

on the Moon, or on other planetarybodies. The harsh environmental

stresses and the isolation that

must be faced by people whowinter over in Antarctica, however,

are similar in many ways. If the

logistical problems of doingresearch there and the attendant

costs can be coped with, perhapsAntarctica is the best place within

the Earth's gravity field to analyze

the problems of life in space and

even to put a space stationsimulator or to model a lunar

outpost. Also it is a good place

to develop plans for continuousmonitoring of human behavior

under rigorous conditions, by

procedures such as those basedon living systems theory, which isoutlined below. If that kind of

Antarctic research is infeasible or

unduly costly, we can consider

doing space station research at

other locations, such as the Space

Biospheres at Oracle, Arizona, or

on space station simulators at

Marshall Space Flight Center inHuntsville, Alabama; at McDonnell

Douglas Corporation in HuntingtonBeach, California; or at Ames

Research Center at Moffett Field,

California.

233

ORIGINAL FAGE

BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAP_

Researcher notes condition of insect-

growing area at Biosphere II

Biosphere !1 Test Module

On November 2, t989, botanist LJnda

Leigh stepped inside an airlock andentered an ecosystem separate from thebiosphere of the Earth. For the next21 days, the air she breathed, the watershe drank, and the food she ate weregenerated by the ecosystem within the17 O00-cubic-foot airtight glass and steelTest Module of Space BiospheresVentures in Oracle, Arizona. Leigh

harvested fruits, vegetables, herbs, andfish grown in the module and preparedthem in the module's human habitat

section, which includes an efficiencykitchen, a bathroom with a shower, a bed,

and a study area with a desk. Shecommunicated with colleagues andobserved air and water quality data, by

computer monitor. In this, as in theprevious two tests, all environmental qualityindicators remained well within safetyfimits and the human inhabitant remained

in excellent health and spirits. JamesGrier Miller suggests the appfication ofmeasures based on living systems theoryto human behavior in such a simulation of

fife on a space station.

234

ZF7_ZZ : Z

.=

ORIGINAL '-' _'""

BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPH'

Synopsis of Living

Systems Theory

Living systems theory (LST)

provides one possible basis forsuch research. This is an

integrated conceptual approach to

the study of biological and social

living systems, the technologiesassociated with them, and the

ecological systems of which they

are all parts. It offers a method of

analyzing systems--living systems

process analysis--which has been

used in basic and applied research

on a variety of different kinds of

systems.

Since 1984 my colleagues and I

have been examining how LST cancontribute to the effectiveness of

space planning and management.At the NASA summer study in

LaJolla, we focused on strategic

planning for a lunar base. Sincethen a team of behavioral and

other scientists has explored ways

in which a living systems analysiscould be employed by NASA to

enhance the livability of the Space

Shuttle and eventually of the spacestation.

The LST approach to research

and theoretical writing differs

significantly from that commonly

Space Station Trainer

This accurate physical mockup of aspace station module is used to trainprospective crewmembers in the use ofequipment. The Johnson Space Centeralso has simulators, which, althoughtheydo not look from the outside as the actualhardware will look, do give crewmembersthe feeling of being in space. It is notpossible to make a trainer/simulator thatboth looks and feels like the real thing.NASA planners also look at analogsituations, like the isolated environmentat the South Pole, to study how peoplefunction under such rigorous conditions.

235

236

followedinempiricalscience.OnereasonforthisdifferenceisthatLSTwasdevelopedbyaninterdisciplinarygroupof scientistsratherthanrepresentativesof onediscipline.Manymembersof thegroupwereseniorprofessorswithnationalandinternationalrecognitionintheirownspecialties.Allmembershadadvancedtraininginatleastonediscipline.Buttheyagreedontheimportanceofachievingunity in science, working

toward t3_e goal of its ultimate

integration bydeveloping generaltheories. Research concerned with

living systems is designed with this

goal in mind. It focuses on the

following concerns.

1. Compartmentalization ofScience

Modern science suffers from

structural problems that have their

roots in conceptual issues. The

organization of universities by

departments, and the structure of

science generally, emphasizes the

separate discipIines_ The rewardsof academic life are given for

becoming expert in a specialty orsubspec_lty_]t is important,

however, that, although the major

work of science must be done by

specialists, they should all realize

that they are contributing to amosaic and that their work fits, like

a piece of a jigsaw puzzle, into an

overall picture.

In the real world of daily affairs,

whether one is dealing with

computers and information

processing or with housing,

finance, legislation, or industrial

production, the problems are always

interdisciplinary. The problems

that face space enterprises are

also interdisciplinary. Each

major project needs the skills of

engineers, lawyers, economists,

computer scientists, biologists,and social scientists in different

combinations.

2. Inductive General Theory

There are two major stages inthe scientific process: first, the

inductive stage, and, second, the

deductive stage. The inductive

stage is logically prior. Scientists

begin the first stage by observing

some class of phenomena and

identifying certain similaritiesamong these phenomena.

Then they consider alternative

explanations for these similarities

and generate hypotheses to

determine which explanationis correct.

A goal of Science that has been

recognized for centuries is the

development of both special

theories of limited scope and

genera[the0ries that unify or

integrate special theories and cover

broader spheres of knowledge. It

is usually necessary to start with

specialtheoriesthatdealwith a

limited set of phenomena. Middle-

range theories concerned with a

greater number of phenomenacome later. Ultimately a body ofresearch based on these leads to

general theories that include a

major segment of the total subjectmatter of a field or of several

fields.

The desirability and usefulness of

general theory is more widelyacknowledged in some disciplines,

like mathematics and physics,

than in others. Unfortunately

many students of science andeven senior scientists have not

been taught about this goal andare unaware of it. Of course

scientists, under the principles ofthe First Amendment and of

academic freedom, may generate

their hypotheses any way they

please. Then they can test or

evaluate them by collecting dataand either confirm or disprove

them. The findings resulting

from such a procedure, however,

may not have any discoverablerelationship to the findings of anyother research in the same field.

Voluntary scientific self-disciplinein the mature sciences leads

researchers to prefer to carry out

studies which test hypotheses

that distinguish critically between

alternative special theories,

middle-range theories, and

ultimately general theories. The

goal of research on LST is tocollect data to make deductive

tests of hypotheses derived frominductive, integrative theory.

3. Common Dimensions

If scientists or engineers fromdifferent fields are to work

together, it is desirable that thedimensions and measurements

they use be compatible.Experimenters in physical and

biological sciences ordinarily

make their measurements usingdimensions identical to those used

by other scientists in those fields,or other units that have known

transformations to them.

It should eventually be possible to

write transformation equations to

reduce dimensions of any of the

disciplines of physical, biological,or social science into common

dimensions that are compatible

with the meter-kilogram-second

system of measurement so that

specialists in different fieldscan communicate precisely.

Investigators studying LST attemptto use such dimensions whenever

it is possible.

If some phenomena of living

systems cannot be measured

along such dimensions, one or

more others may have to be used.If this is done, however, an explicit

statement should always be made

that those particular dimensions

237

areincommensurablewiththeestablisheddimensionsof naturalscience.Furthermore,resoluteeffortsshouldbemadeto discovertransformationequationsthatrelatethemto theestablisheddimensions.Ourexperienceindicatesthatinmanycasesthiscanbedone. Theuseoftransformationequationsisadvocatedratherthananattemptto godirectlyto somesystemofcommondimensionsbecausepeopleindifferentdisciplinesoftenfeelthatthemeasurestowhichtheyareaccustomedarepreferablein theirownfields.Transformationequationsarea reasonablefirststepto commondimensions.

Comparabledimensionsforlivingandnonlivingsystemsareincreasinglyusefulas matter-

energy and information processing

technologies become more

sophisticated and are more widely

employed throughout the World.The design of person/machine

interfaces, for exarn_pie, is moreprecise and efficient when both

sides are measured comparably.

Engineers and behavioral scientists

are able to cooperate in joint

projects much more effectively than

they ordinarily have in the past,

Such cooperation greatly facilitates

space science. Such comparabilityof dimensions is a main theme of

the program projected in this

proposal.

4. Coexistence of Structure and

Process

It is important not to separate

functional (that is, process)science from structural science.

Psychology and physiology are

process sciences at the level of

the organism, and sociology

and political science are process

sciences at the level of the society.

Gross anatomy and neuroanatomyare structura| sciences at the level

of the organism, and physical

geography is a structural science

at the level of the society.

A psychologist or neurophysiologist,

however, is inevitably limited if

she or he cannot identify theanatomical structure that mediates

an observed process, and an

anatomist can have only a partial

understanding of a structure

without comprehending its function.

Consequently, whenever a processhas been identified but the structure

that carries it out is not known, it

should be an insistent goal of

science to identify the structure.The opposite is als0 true: It should

be an insistent goal of science to

identify the process or processesthat a structure Carries out. Often

this is disregarded because it is

not thought to be urgent. The

main reason for this appearsto be that, in the academic world,

process or functional sciences are

administratively separate from,

238

andinpoorcommunicationwith,theirrelevantstructuralsciences(e.g.,grossanatomyatthe leveloftheorganismor physicalgeographyatthe levelofthesociety).

5. Biosocial Evolution

Living systems are open systemsthat take from the environment

substances of lower entropy and

higher information content (food,

energy, information) than they putback into the environment (waste,

heat, noise). This thermodynamically

improbable increase of internalinformation (negative entropy),

which does not occur in nonliving

systems, makes it possible for themto grow, do work, make products,

and carry on other life functions.

On the basis of a mass of

supporting scientific evidence,LST asserts that over the last

approximately 3.8 billion years acontinuous biosocial evolution has

occurred, in the overall direction of

increased complexity. It has so far

resulted in eight levels of living

systems: cells, organs, organisms,

groups, organizations, communities,

societies, and supranational systems.This evolution came about by a

process of fray-out (see fig. 1) in

which the larger, higher-level

systems evolved with more (and

more complex) components in each

subsystem than those below them

in the hierarchy of living systems.

Fray-out can be likened to the

unraveling of a ship's cable. The

cable is a single unit but it can

separate into the several ropes

that compose it. These can unravelfurther into finer strands, strings,and threads.

Systems at each succeeding level

are composed principally of systemsat the level below. Cells have

nonliving molecular components,

organs are composed of cells,

organisms of organs, groups are

composed of organisms, and so

on. Systems at higher levels are

suprasystems of their component,lower-level systems, which are

organized into subsystems, each

of which performs one of theactivities essential to all living

systems.

Our identification of these

subsystems was under way by

1955. By 1965 we had identified19 of them. A 20th, the timer,

was identified only recently (Miller

1990). It is interesting that a

group of researchers at Lockheed

Corporation in 1985, apparently

without any underlying conceptual

theory or any knowledge of our

previous work, identified a set ofelements and subelements of the

living and nonliving aspects of a

space station with significant

similarities to our subsystems.

They were not wholly comparable,however. One incompatibility is that

the Lockheed researchers listed as

elements or subelements not only

what we call "subsystems" but also

what we call "levels" and "flows."

239

Level

Supranationalsystem Filament

!

Figure 1

Fray.Out

We can visualize the relationshipamong the levels of living systems bycomparing a ceil to a ship's cable. Asthe more complex levels "fray-out" fromtheir cellular form, they grow and thusproduce the larger forms. Each of theselevels, small or large, is composed ofthe same 20 subsystems, however.

240

Society

Community

Organization

Group

Organism

Organ

Cell

Fiber

Thread

String

Strand

Cord

Rope

Hawser

6. Emergents

The fact that systems at each

level have systems at the level

next below as their principal

components doesn't mean that

it is possible to understand any

system as just an accumulation of

lower-level systems. A cell cannot

be described by summing the

chemical properties of the

molecules that compose it, nor can

an organism be described by evena detailed account of the structure

and processes of its organs. LST

gives no support to reductionism.

At each higher level of living

systems there are importantsimilarities to the lower levels, but

there are also differences. Higher-

level systems have emergent

structures and processes that are

not present at lower levels.

Emergents are novel processes,

made possible because higher-level

systems have a greater number of

components with more complicated

relationships among them. It is this

increased complexity that makes

the whole system greater than the

simple sum of its parts, and gives

it more capability. Higher-level

systems are larger, on average,

and more complex than those

below them in the hierarchy of

living systems. They can adapt to

a greater range of environmentalvariation, withstand more stress,

and exploit environments not

available to less complex systems.

7. The Subsystems of Living

Systems

Because of the evolutionary

relationship among them, all

living systems have similar

requirements for matter and

energy, without which they cannot

survive. They must secure food,

fuel, or raw materials. They must

process their inputs in various

ways to maintain their structure,

reproduce, make products, andcarry out other essential activities.The metabolism of matter and

energy is the energetics of living

systems.

Input, processing, and output ofinformation is also essential in living

systems. This is the "metabolism"of information.

LST identifies 20 essential

processes which, together with one

or more components, constitute the

20 subsystems of living systems

(see table 1). With the exception

of the 2 subsystems of the learning

process, which seem to have

evolved with animal organisms,

all 20 processes appear to be

present at each of the eight levels,

although they may not be present

in all types of systems at a givenlevel. Bacteria, which are cells,

for example, have no motor

subsystems but many other types

of cells have motor componentsand can move about in the

241

environmentormovepartsoftheenvironmentwithrelationtothem.Similarly,somegroupsandorganizationsprocesslittleornomatter-energy.Somesystemsclearlyhavecomponentsforcertainprocessesbutthese

componentshavenotbeenidentified.Thisis largelytruefororganismassociating.Eventhesimplestanimalshavesomeformof learningbutthecomponentsarenotcertainlyknown.

TABLE1. The Subsystems of Living Systems

Subsystems which process both matter-energy and information

1. Reproducer, the subsystem which carries out the instructions in the genetic information or charter of a system and mobilizes matter, energy, and

information to produce one or more similar systems.

2. Boundary, the subsystem at the perimeter of a system that holds together the components which make up the system, protects them from

environmental stresses, and excludes or permits entry to various sorts of matter-energy and information.

Subsystems which process matter-energy Subsystems which process information

3. Ingestor, the subsystem which brings matter-energy across t 1. Input transducer, the sensory subsystem which brings markers bearing

the system boundary from the environment information into the system, changing them to other matter-energy formssuitable for transmission within it.

12. Internal transducer, the sensory subsystem which receives, from subsystems

or components within the system, markers bearing information about

significant alterations in those subsystems or components, changing them toother matter-energy forms of a sort which can be transmitted within it.

4. t3 Channel and net, the subsystem composed of a single route in physicalspace or multiple interconnected routes 0vet which markers bearing

information are transmitted to all parts of the system.

14 Timer, the subsystem which transmits to the decider information about time-related states of' the environment or of components of the system. This

information signals the decider of the system or deciders of subsystems to

start, stop, alter the rate, or advance or delay the phase of one or more of the

system's processes, thus coordinating them in time.

5. 15. Decoder, the subsystem which alters the code of information input to it

through the input transducer or internal transducer into a "private" code thatcan be used internally by the system.

6 16. Associator, the subsystem which carries out the first stage of the learning

process, forming enduring associations among items of information in the

system.

Distributor, the subsystem which carries inputs from outside

the system or outputs from its subsystems around the

system to each component.

Converter, the subsystem which changes certain inputs to

the system into forms more useful for the.special processes

of that particular system.

Producer, the subsystem which forms stable associationsthat endure for significant periods among matter-energy

inputs to the system or outputs from its converter, the

materials synthesized being for growth, damage repair, orreplacement of components of the system, or for providing

energy for moving or constituting the system's outputs of

products or information markersto its suprasystem.Matter-energy" storage, the subsystem which places matter

or energy at some location in the system, retains it over time,

and retrieves it.

8. Extruder, the subsystem which transmits matter-energy out

of the system in the forms of products or wastes

9. Motor, the subsystem which moves the system or parts of it

in relation to part or all of its environment or movescomponents of its environment in relation to each other.

10. Supporter, the subsystem which maintains the proper spatial

relationships among components of the system, so that theycan interact without weighting each other down or crowding

each other.

17

18.

19

I 20.

Memory, the subsystem which carries out the second stage of the learning

process, storing information in the system for different periods of time, and

then retrieving it.Decider, the executive subsystem which receives information inputs from all

other subsystems and transmits to them outputs for guidance, coordination,

and control of the system.Encoder. the subsystem which alters the code of information input to it from

other information processing subsystems, from a "private" code used

internally by the system into a "public" code which can be interpreted by

other systems in its environment.Output transducer, the subsystem which puts out markers bearing

information from the system, changing markers within the system into other

matter-energy forms which can be transmitted over channels in the system's

environment

242

A setof symbols,shownin figure2,havebeendesignedto representthelevels,subsystems,andmajorflowsin livingsystems.Theyareintendedfor usein simulationsand

diagramsandarecompatiblewiththestandardsymbolsof electricalengineeringandcomputerscience.Theycanalsobeusedingraphicsandflowcharts.

Levels

1, Cell 5. Organization

2. Organ 6. Community

3. Organism 7. Society

4. Group 8. Supranational

system

its Suprasystem its Subsystems

Example- A group in Exam_e; A groupan organ_zalion

Subsystemin its _-_ SubsystemSystem Example: A group whichExample;A decoder is a reproducer in asubsystemin a group higher-Tevelsystem

Subsystems

Matter-Energy &Information

.4Reproducer

Bounda_

Matter-Energy

tngestor

Distributor I_

Converter

Producer

Matter-energy 6storage

Extruder

Motor

Supporter

Information

,_ Inputtransducer

Internaltransducer

[_ hanneland net

Q Timer

Decoder

•_ Associator

{_ Memory

O Decider _<_

Output

_ill_# transducer

Stages of Deciding

Purposes

Goals

O Purposesand goals

Analysis

_ ynthesis

t_ Implementing

Transmissions

Matler Energy

> >Information

mmmmmO = _>People Money

(Mailer Energy lntormalion) (Subclass of information)

Nonliving Subsystems

A doI iS added to Ihe center of a symbolto indicate a non?iving subsystem

ConverterlmProducerD ,ngestor} Figure 2

Living Systems Theory Symbols

243

Ifa system lacks components for

a given subsystem or part of it,

it may disperse the process to a

system at the same or anotherlevel. Symbiosis and parasitism

are examples. The essential partof the associator subsystem in

organizations is downwardly

dispersed to human brains, since

an organization makes associations

only when human subcomponents

have done so. An organization

may, however, have some

components, like a training

department, that are involved in

the process, tt is also possible for

TABLE 2. Selected Major Components of Each of the 20 Critical Subsystems

at Each of the Eight Levels of Living Systems"

Subsystem Reproducer

Level

Cell DNA and

RNA

molecules

Organ Upwa_dty

dispe_ sad Io

organism

Organism Tesles,

ovaries,

ulerus,

genitalia

Group NASA oIb_.el

who selects

astronauls for

crew

Organization OispersRd

upward In

society [hul

creates space

agency

Communlly S_ce _n_y

that eslabtishes

space slabon

Sociely Constitutional

convention thai

writes nalional

conslilufion

Supranational United

sySlem Nalions when

H c,eales new

51zpral)a li_nal

agency

Boundary

i Maffet energy

_nd inlormMion

Ouler membrane

Matter energy

I and fnfc_matfon

Capsule or

outer layer

Mafia, energy

and information ¸

Skin of

othel ouler

covedng

Matfel.energy

Inspe_lor s ol

covering ot

_;pacecrat I

hlformalion:

Crew radio

operalor

Mailer energy

NASA

: i,_speclors ol

: contlacfed

equtpmenl

InformMion

NASA guards

who arresl

inlruders

Metre, -energy

Dispersed to

builders of

habilal

tl]formalion

Operalors

of downlink

to Earth

Matter-energy

Customs serwce

Into,mellon

Security agency

Matter.energy

Troops al

8edin Wall

I hdormation

NATO security

i personnel

Ingestol

TranSpOrt

molecules

Input arlery

Mouth.

nor,B, skin,

tn some

species

Aslron_ulS

who bring

damaged

sat elfile into

spacecraft

Receiving

depattmenl

otNASA

cenler

Receivers of

malerlats

Irom

Shutlte

fmmigralion

service

Legislalive

body Ihat

admils

nations

Oistribulor

Endoplasmic

reticulum

Intercellular

fluid

Vascular

system of

higher animals

Crewmernber

who disbibules

food

Conveyer

bell in

factory thai

makes parls

Ior space

habital

Food smvers

in dining

lacilily

Operalors ol

national

railroads

Personnel

who operate

supranational

power grids

Converler

Enzyme In

mit ochondrion

Parenchymal

cell

Upper

gast_oinlestinai

Ifacl

Dispersed Io

maker ol

packaged

rabons

Wot kers who

stamp out

paris Ior

space

vehicle

Organizallon

Ihalmmes

Moon

Nuclear

induslry

EURATOM,

CERN,

IAEA

Producer

Chtomplasl

In green

planl

Is_ls of

LanOerhans

olpancreas

OTgansthal

synlheSlzg

malerials lot

melabollsm

and repair

C_ewmembers

who repair

damaged

equtpmen! .

OO_tOf S who

examine

aslronauts

MedicaT

organization

in space

communlly

All farmers

and lectory

workers ol a

counlry

Wod, d

Heallh

Organlzalion

Adenosine

t riphosphate

Central

lumen of

glands

Fatty

llssues

Crewmember

who slows

scienltlic

instrumenls

Wolkers

who since

supplies on

space vehicle

Wmkers

who put supplies

into slorage

areas

Soldiers

in Army

balracks

Intelnalional

storage

dams and

reservoirs

Exlruder

Contractile

vacuoles

Output

vein

Sweat

glands ol

animal skin

Crew that

e)eclssatellge

into orbit

Janitors

in NASA

buildings

Mine

organization

Ibalsends

minerals

I0 Earth

Export

organizalIOns

ol a counlry

Downwardly

dispersed tO

sociebes

Motor

Cilia, flaQetlae,

pseudopodia

Smoolhmusc_,

cardiac muscle

Skelelal

muscle of

higher animals

Oownwaldly

dispersed to

individual

members

Driver of

ganlry

crane

Drivers

of Moon

surface

vehicles

Aeeosp_lce

induslry

thai builds

spac,ec raft

Operators of

Untied

Nations

molc_ pool

Suppot let

Cytoskelet on

Slroma

Skeleton

Crewmembers

who maintam

spacecraft

Janitors in

launch site

buildings

Maintenance

crew ol

habgal

buildings

Officials who

operale national

public buidings

and lands

People who

maintain

inlernatlonal

tmadqua_ters

buildings

244

systemsthatlacka givenprocessto useanalternativeprocessto accomplisha similareffect.Individualbacteriacannotadapttotheenvironmentby learning,sincetheylackassociatorandmemorysubsystems,butbacterialcoloniesdoadaptbyalteringtheexpressionof genes.Componentsof the

20subsystemsateachleveloflivingsystemsarelistedin table2.

Similarvariablescanbemeasuredineachsubsystematall levels.Thesearesuchthingsasquantity,quality,rate,andlaginflowsofmatter,energy,or information.

TABLE2 (concluded).

Subsystem

Level

Cell

Organ

Organism

Inpul

transducer

Receptol slles

on mem_ane

foe activation of

cyclic AMP

Receplol

celt of

sense

organ

Sense organs

Internal

Iransducer

Reoressor

molecules

Specialized

cell of sinoatrial

node of heart

Propriocept ms

Channel

and nel

Pathways of

mRNA, second

messengers

Nerve nel el

organ

PLormonal

pathways,

cenlral and

peripheral

nerve nets

Timer

Fluctuating ATP

and NADP

Hearl

pacemaker

Suplaoptic

nuclei of

thalamus

Decoder

Molecular

binding sites

Second echelon

cell of sense

organ

Sensory nuclei

Associdt or

Unknown

None found;

upwardly

dispe., sed Io

olganlsm

Unknown

neural

con,pUllenlS

Memory

None found.

upwardly

dispersed to

organism

Unknown

neural

components

Decider

Regulator genes

Sympalhelic

f,ber of

sinoal rlal node

el heart

Componenls al

several echelons

el i_ervous

syslem

Encoder

SlruClure that

synthesizes

hormones

Plesynapllc

legion ot

output

neuron

TempotopaHelal

are,i el

d_lzielanl

hemisphere of

human col te_(

Oulpul

transducer

Presynaplic

membrane

el neuron

Presynaplic

region of

output

neuron

Larynx; olher

componenls

Ihal outpul

slgnats

Group Crewmember Clewlnember Aslronauts who Dispersed to Member who D+spelsed tu ell Dlsper_.ed Caplam el crew Members who Membels

who recetves who repoqts communfcale all members explains coded members who Io all in capsule write lepor ts who repoll

messages from crew's reaclions parson to person who hear me_,sage learn new crewmembers el space Io Mission

ground coetlol to lile in capsule brae sigllals lechnlques experience ConlfOl

Organizalion NASA Representative Users of NASA OIhce EKpef|s who People who Filing NASA Public lelatio.s Adminislralot

secletaries of employees inlernal phone responsible explai,_ specs tram new depdrlmenl execullves, slatl who makes

who take who reports network lot scheduling Io contractor_ employees deparlmenl policy

incoming calls Io execufive II_hls heads, middle television

managers speech

Community Operators of CommuniCator Psychologists Carelakers of Users of Engineers Scienlists Celdral Commanding elf ice+ who

downlink to over downlink who report clocks in commumcation who mterprel who do compule= (dlicer af_d wr+tes report

Earth IO E,*rth on morale ot cummunily syslem In budding research In of space 51=11 to Eallh

spacefarer s space station bluel_inls space community slaPon

Society Foreign news Public opinion Telephone and Legislature Cryptographers All leaching Keepers at Voters and Oratlers ol N.Hional

_rVl_ polling communicalions who decide on inslilubons el a national OtllClals at treal4es tepresenlat+ves

organizations; organizations lime and zone counlry archives national Io mlernalional

vOlerS changes government meetings

Supranational UN Assembly Speaker Item iNTELSAT Pei'sonnel el Translalors Ior FAO units Ihal Librarians of _li+Jllal UN Office of Official who

system hearing member Greenwich supranational leach In,ruing UN libraries represenlatlves Public announces

speaker Irom counlry to obserValory meetings methods in Third to inlernational Inlormal_on decisions of

nonmember supranal lot,el World nalions space supr anabonal

ler,ltory meel,ng conterences body

*Nole Tile components hsled in lable 2 are examples selected from many possible structures of each subsyslem and at each level At the organism level,

animals are chosen in preference to plants, although many components of plants are comparable In general, examples are hum human rather than animal

grllups, allhuogh similar structures exist in many other species Only human beings form systems above the group Table 2 places special emphasis on living

systems involved in space exploration and habitalion At each level the examples of subsystem components are from different lypes of systems This choice

m_kus it clear that the analysis applies to various sorts of syslems At the level of the group and above, components involved in communications rather Ihan

rnonetary flows are used as examples in inlormation processing subsystems This is done because monetary flows, while obviously important, are found only

irf hurnan systems and are currently nol very significanl in space habitations.

245

i

246

8. Adjustment Processes

Living systems of all kinds exist inan uncertain environment to which

they must adapt. Excesses or

deficits of necessary matter-energy

or information inputs can stressthem and threaten their continued

well-being or even their existence.

In the midst of flux, they must

maintain steady states of theirinnumerable variables.

Each system has a hierarchyof values that determines its

preference for one internal steady

state rather than another; that is,

it has purposes. These arecomparison values that it matches

to information inputs or internaltransductions to determine how

far any variable has been forced

from its usual steady state. A

system may also have external

goals, such as finding and

killing prey or reaching a target

in space.

All living systems have adjustment

processes, sometimes called

"coping mechanisms," that theycan use to return variables to

their usual steady states. Theseare alterations in the rates or

other aspects of the flows of

matter, energy, and information.Subsystems also match the state

of each variable they control with

a comparison signal and use

adjustment processes to correctdeviations from it. In general,

more adjustment processes are

available to higher level systemsthan to those at lower levels.

Countless small adjustments take

place continually as a living system

goes about its essential activities.Minor deviations can often be

corrected by a single component

of one subsystem. More serious

threats are countered by a greater

number of subsystems or all ofthem. Severe deviations from

steady state constitute pathologythat a system may not be able tocorrect.

The six classes of adjustment

processes vary the input, internal,and output processing of matter

and energy (matter-energy) andinformation.

All adjustment processes are

used at some cost to the system.

Ordinarily a system that survives

chooses the least costly of itsalternatives.

9. Cross-Level Research

Because of the similarities that exist

across all levels of life, empirical

cross-level comparisons are

possible and are the sort of basicresearch that is most characteristic

of living systems science. Sincethe evolution of the levels has

occurred in physical space-time,

their comparable subsystems

and variables can ultimately be

measured in meter-kilogram-second

or compatible units.

Researchtotestcross-level

hypotheses began in the 1950sand continues to the present

(Miller 1986a). Such research can

provide accurate and dependable

fundamental knowledge about thenature of life that can be the basis

for a wide range of applications.

LST research strategy: The

following strategy is used to

analyze systems at any level. It

has been applied to systems as

different as psychiatric patients

and organizations.

"1o Identify and make a two- or

three-dimensional map of

the structures that carry out

the 20 critical subsystem

processes in the system

being studied (see table 2).

. Identify a set of variables

in each subsystem that

describe its basic processes.At levels of group and below,

these represent aspects of

the flows of matter, energy,and information. At levels

of organization and above it

has proved useful to measurefive instead of three flows:

MATFLOW, materials;

ENFLOW, energy;

COMFLOW, person-to-

person, person-to-machine,and machine-to-machine

communications information;

PERSFLOW, individual and

group personnel (who are

composed of matter and

energy and also storeand process information);

and MONFLOW, money,

money equivalents, account

entries, prices, and costs-a

special class of information.

. Determine the normal values

of relevant variables of every

subsystem and of the systemas a whole and measure them

over time, using appropriateindicators.

The normal values of innumerable

variables have been established for

human organisms. A physician canmake use of reliable tests and

measurements and accepted

therapeutic procedures to discover

and correct pathology in a patient.Similar information is not available

to the specialist who seeks to

improve the cost-effectiveness of

an organization. Studies that make

it possible to generalize among

organizations are few, with theresult that the usual values of most

variables are unknown at

organization and higher levels.This lack makes it difficult to

determine to what extent an

organization's processes deviatefrom "normal" for systems of its

type. Pathology in an organization

may become apparent only

when deviation is so great that

acceptance of the organization's

products or services declines or

bankruptcy threatens.

247

Z

248i

i

, Take action to correct

dysfunctional aspects of the

system and make it healthier

or more cost-effective, by,

for example, removing a

psychiatric patient from anunfavorable environment,

altering the structure or

process of a work group, or

introducing nonliving artifacts

(like computers or faster

transport equipment) into an

organization.

Our proposed study would apply

the above strategy to evaluatingthe cost-effectiveness of the

operations of a crew of a Space

station, tracking the five categoriesof flows through its 20 subsystems,

identifying its Strengths and

dysfunctions, and recommending

ways to improve its operations.

Later a similar approach could be

applied to a mission to Mars, alunar settlement, and perhaps other

human communities in space. Itcould also be used at Antarctic

bases.

Validation of LST: LST arises

from the integration of a largenumber of observations and

experiments on systems of avariety of types that represent

all eight levels. As with otherscientific theories, however, its

assertions cannot be accepted

without validation.

How have some of the well-known

theories been validated? Consider,

for example, Mendeleyev's periodic

table of the elements, first

published in the mid-19th century.

In its original form, it was based on

a hypothesis that the elements

could be arranged according to

their atomic weights and that their

physical properties were related to

their place in the table. Revisions

by Mendeleyev and others over

succeeding years led to discoveryof errors in the assigned atomic

weights of 17 elements and

included new elements as they

were discovered, but the properties

of some required that several pairsof elements be reversed, in the

early 1920s, after the discovery

of atomic numbers, a hypothesis

by van den Brock that the tablewould be correct if atomic number

rather than atomic weight were

used as its basis was confirmed by

H. G. J. Moseley's measurement

of spectral lines. The present form

of the table places all knownelements in correct order and has

made it possible to predict thecharacteristics of elements to be

discovered in nuclear reactions.

Confirmation of Mendeleyev's

theory required testing of a

succession of hypotheses based

on it. No theory can be consideredvalid until such observation and

research have shown that its

predictions about the real systemswith which it is concerned are

accurate.

If LST is to have validity andusefulness, confirmation of

hypotheses related to it is

essential.The first test of an

LST hypothesis was a cross-level

study of information input overload

at five levels of living systems,

carried out in the 1950s (Miller

1978, pp. 121-202). It confirmed

the hypothesis that comparable

information input-output curves

and adjustment processes to an

increase in rate of information inputwould occur in systems at the level

of cell, organ, organism, group,

and organization. Numerous other

quantitative experiments have

been done on systems at variouslevels to test and confirm cross-

level hypotheses based on living

systems theory (e.g., Rapoport and

Horvath 1961, Lewis 1981). Such

tests support the validity of living

systems theory.

Applications of LivingSystems Theory

Living systems theory has been

applied to physical and mental

diagnostic examinations of individual

patients and groups (Kluger 1969,Bolman 1970, Kolouch 1970) and to

psychotherapy of individual patients

and groups (Miller and Miller 1983).An early application of LST at

organism, group, and organization

levels was a study by Hearn in the

social service field (1958).

An application of living systems

concepts to families described

the structure, processes, and

pathologies of each subsystemas well as feedbacks and other

adjustment processes (Miller andMiller 1980). A subsystem review

of a real family* was carried out in a

videotaped interview that followed aschedule designed to discover whatmembers were included in each of

several subsystems, how the family

decided who would carry out each

process, how much time was spent

in each, and what problems the

family perceived in each process.

Research at the level of

organizations includes a study of

some large industrial corporations

(Duncan 1972); general analyses

of organizations (Lichtman andHunt 1971, Reese 1972, Noell

1974, Alderfer 1976, Berrien

1976, Rogers and Rogers 1976,

and Merker 1982, 1985); an

explanation of certain pathologiesin organizations (Cummings and

DeCotiis 1973); and studies of

accounting (Swanson and Miller

1989), management accounting

(Weekes 1983), and marketing

(Reidenbach and Oliva 1981).Other studies deal with assessment

of the effectiveness of a hospital

(Merker 1987) and of a metropolitan

transportation utility (Bryant 1987).

*Personalcommunication (videotape and script) from R. A. Bell, 1986.

249

250

Thelargestapplicationof LSThasbeena studyoftheperformanceof 41U.S.Armybattalions(Ruscoeetal.1985).It revealedimportantrelationshipsbetweencharacteristicsof matter-energyandinformationprocessingandbattalioneffectiveness.

A researchstudyisbeingconductedinc0operationwithIBM,applyinglivingsystemsprocessanalysistotheflowsof materials,energy,communications,money,andpersonnelina corporation,inordertodetermineitscost-

effectiveness and productivity.

Discussions of possible use of

living systems process analysisto evaluate cost-effectiveness in

Government agencies are underway with the General AccountingOffice of the United States.

Several researchers (Bolman

1967; Baker and O'Brien 1971;

Newbrough 1972; Pierce 1972;

Burgess, Nelson, and Wallhaus

1974) have used LST as a

framework for modeling, analysis,

and evaluation of communitymental health activities and health

delivery systems. LST has also

provided a theoretical basis forassessing program effectiveness

in community life (Weiss and

Rein 1970).

After a pretest of comparable

methods of evaluation, a study of

public schools in the San Francisco

area was carried out (Banathy and

Mills 1985). A more extensive

study of schools in that area is now

in process under a grant from theNational Science Foundation.

The International Joint Commission

of Canada and the United States

has been using living systems

theory as a conceptual framework

for exploring the creation of a

supranational electronic network to

monitor the region surrounding the

border separating those two

countries (Miller 1986b).

Other applied research studies are

in planning stages, and proposals

are being prepared for someof them. These include an

investigation of how to combinebibliographical information on living

systems at the cell, organ, and

organism levels by the use ofcomputer software employing living

systems concepts; an analysis ofinsect behavior in an ant nest;

and a study of organizational

behavior and organizational

pathology in hospitals.

The conceptual framework of

LST and its implications for the

generalization of knowledge fromone discipline to another have been

discussed by many authors (seeMiller 1978 and Social Science

Citation Index 1979 ft.).

It is tooearlyto makea definitiveevaluationofthevalidityof livingsystemstheory.Notenoughstudieshavebeencarriedoutandnotenoughdatahavebeencollected.It is possibleto say,however,thatthetheoryhasprovedusefulin conceptualizingandworkingwithrealsystemsatsevenof theeightlevels.Studiesattheeighthlevel,theorgan,havenotsofar beencarriedoutbutthesewillbeundertakenin thefuture. Inaddition,thegeneralconsensusof publishedarticlesaboutthetheoryhasbeensupportive.

A Proposed LST Space

Research Project

It appears probable that the space

station that is now in the planning

stage at NASA will become a reality

in the next few years. It would be

a prototype for future nonterrestrialcommunities--on the Moon and on

Mars.

The crew of such a station would

include not only astronauts but also

technicians and other personnel.

They would spend a much longer

time in the space environment

than crews of space vehicles on

previous missions had spent.

Our research method would use

LST process analysis to study the

space station crew, identify its

strengths and dysfunctions,

evaluate the performance of

personnel, and recommend ways to

improve the cost-effectiveness of its

operations.

Until the space station is in

operation, we would study humanactivities on modules of a simulated

space station. The method used in

this phase could later be applied to

the space station and eventually tosettlements on the Moon or on

Mars.

The basic strategy of LST process

analysis of organizations is to track

the five flows--matter, energy,

personnel, communication, and

monetary information--through

the 20 subsystems and observe andmeasure variables related to each.

Since money flows would probably

be unimportant in the early stages of

a space station, only the first four are

relevant to the first phase ofthis research. A larger and more

permanent space settlement might

well have a money economy.

We would measure such variables

as rate of flow of essential materials;

lags, error rates, and distortion ininformation transmissions; timeliness

of completing assigned tasks; andtime and resource costs of various

activities.

Data Collection

We plan to collect both subjective

and objective data.

251

252

Subjectivedatawouldconsistofresponsesbypersonneltoquestionsabouttheiractivitiesrelatedto thevariablesunderstudy. Questionswouldbepresentedandansweredoncomputerterminals.Responseswouldbecollectedina centralizedknowledgebasefor analysisbyacomputerizedexpertsystem.

Inadditionto thesesubjectivereports,ourresearchdesignincludestheuseofobjectiveindicatorsorsensorsto monitorflowsinallsubsystemsandcomponentsandmeasurethemona real-timebasis.Atimeseriesofdataaboutthemwouldbetransmittedor telemeteredtotheknowledgebasein thecomputer:

Inadditionto standardmeasuresof unitsof energy,quantitiesofmaterial,bitsof information,andtheusualpersonnelrecords,weplanto makeuseofa noveltechnicalinnovationto monitorthemovementsof personnelandmaterials.Itconsistsof badgessimilartotheordinaryIDbadgeswornby personnelinmanyorganizations.Eachbadgecontainsan infraredtransponderin theformof a microchipthat,on receiptof an infraredsignalfromanothertransponderonthewall,transmitsa streamof14charactersthatidentifiesthepersonorobjectto whichthe

badgeisattached.Withthisequipmentit is possibleto locatein0.7secanyoneof up to65000personsormaterialssuchasequipment,furniture,weapons,ammunition,or food. Ifdesired,thephonenearestto a person'spresentlocationcanberunginanother0.3sec.

Inthiswaymanyaspectsofprocessessuchastheresponsetimeof personnelto questionsorcommands, the average time spent

in various activities, the patterns of

interactions among peopie, and themovement of equipment to different

parts of the space station can be

measured without unduly disrupting

the day-to-day activities of the

system.

All the data on the five major flows

from questionnaires and objectiveindicators would be stored in a

single computer. Such data could

help NASA officials evaluate the

effects on space station operations

of changes in policy or procedure.In addition, measurements of

variables over time make it

possible to determi.ne norms for

them and to identify deviations

that may show either special

strengths or dysfunctions. With

such information, a computerized

expert system can analyze the

relationships among the different

variables of the five major flows

and suggest ways to improve the

space station's effectiveness.

Figure3 isa diagramof thespacestationshowinghowthefiveflows,MATFLOW,ENFLOW,COMFLOW,PERSFLOW,andMONFLOW,mightgo throughits subsystems.Thesubsystemsareidentifiedby

thesymbolsshownin figure2.Evenwhenonlytheprimaryflowsof eachsortin thespacestationaresuperimposedinadiagramlikefigure3,theyforma verycomplexpattern.

),'-I []Solar arrays Radiator

(Ingestor) (Extruder)

Science

laboratortea

(Aseociat_)

Experiment

pallets

(Aseociator)

÷

RMS

(Motor)

1

0

Command/ Habitat

Control (SuppOrter)

(Decider)

Materials

processing

(Co_veder/Producer)

r'_lLogistics

(Matter-energy

center (Motor)

¢'e

Docking port

(Ingester/Extruder)

ZXV

Main transverse'

boom (Supporter)

Galley 1

-- (Converter]

tEnvironmental

control

(IngestodConverter/

P_/(xtruder)

Station-keeping

rockets

(Motor)

¢,

Living Systems Theory

Space Station / Ma.err----'--I Energy

/ Communications

llll People

Money

Figure 3

The Five Flows in the Subsystems of

the Space Station

253

In a real space situation, use ofmonitoring would be of value inmany ways. It could identify andreport technological or humanproblems as they occurred.Badges would make it easy foreach spacefarer to be found at alltimes. The officer of the watchwould be able to see instantlyon a screen the location of allcrewmembers with active badges.In addition, the computer could beprogrammed to present possiblesolutions to problems and even toinitiate necessary steps to assurecontinuation of mission safety andeffectiveness in the event of in-flight emergencies or breakdowns.

Analyzing such flows in subsystemsof the space station would provideexperience with a novel systemfor monitoring both living andnonliving components of futurespace habitations. This experiencecould well lead to use of similarmethods on manned missions tothe Moon or to Mars.

For instance, some time in thenext century such procedurescould be applied to a lunar outpost,a community that would includemen, women, and children. A widerange of professional interests,expertise, abilities, and perhapscultures mIght be represented in

Monitoring the Movement of Peopleand Equipment at a Space Base

Identification badges containing tinytransponders could track the movementsof the woman playing tennis in this spacebase or the man running on the track.Similarly, property tags with suchmicrochips could report the up-to-the-second location of the monorail train and

guard the artwork and plants against theft.Communication of the microchiptransponders with transponders mountedon walls would continually report themovements of both personnel andmaterials to a computerized expertsystem, If the man servicing the monorailtrain on the lower level were to get hurt,such automatic monitoring could summonaid in I second. And analysis by livingsystems theory methods could determinewhether the interaction between the two

men on the walkway is an insignificantwaste of time, an important social

encounter, or a vital part of an informalcommunications network.

254

the lunarcommunity.Residentswould live for long times underat least 6 feet of earth or othershielding, which would provideprotection from solar radiation,solar flares, and other lunar hazards.

Figure 4 shows such a lunaroutpost with designated areas for acommand center, habitation, solarpower collection, a small nuclearpower plant, lunar mines, a solarfurnace to use the direct rays of

Figure 4

The Five Flows In the Subsystems of a

Lunar Outpost

Mines

(fngestor)

[]Slag

(Ex_'_der)

Lunar f13ver

(Motor}

Miterlall

proceesIng

(ConvettedProducer}

rsl_

Living Systems Theory

Lunar Outpost i Me_,Energy

Communications

IIIIIIII People

Money

255

256

the Sun for smelting ore and

heating the station, a factory, a

slag heap, a farm, recycling

oxygen and hydrogen, waste

disposal, and lunar rovers to

transport materials and people onthe surface of the Moon from one

part of the community to others,as well as for travel outside the

immediate area. The five flows

through the 20 subsystems of this

community are diagramed as were

those of the space station shown

in figure 3.

Conclusion

The conceptual system and

methology of living systemstheory appear to be of value toresearch on life in isolated

environments. A space station,

which must provide suitableconditions for human life in a

stressful environment that meets

none of the basic needs of life, is

an extreme example of suchisolation.

A space station would include living

systems at levels of individual

human beings, groups of people

engaged in a variety of activities,and the entire crew as an

organization. It could also carry

living systems of other species,such as other animals and plants.

Using the subsystem analysis of

living systems theory, planners ofa station, either in space or on a

celestial body, would make sure

that all the requirements for survivalat all these levels had been

considered. Attention would be

given not only to the necessary

matter and energy (including

artifacts such as machinery and

implements) but also the equallyessential information flows that

integrate and control livingsystems. Many variables for each

subsystem could be monitored andkept in steady states.

Use of living systems process

analysis of the five flows of matter-

energy and information wouldassure that all members of the

crew received what they needed,that distribution and communication

were timely and efficient, and thatthe command centers within the

station and on Earth were fullyinformed of the location and

activities of personnel, particularly

during an emergency.

References

AIderfer, C. P. 1976. Change

Processes in Organizations.In Handbook of Industrial and

Organizational Psychology,ed. M. D. Dunnette, 1592-1594.

Chicago: Rand-McNally.

Baker, F., and G. O'Brien. 1971.

Intersystem Relations andCoordination of Human Service

Organizations. American Journal ofPublic Health 61:130-137.

Banathy,B.S.,andS. R.Mills.1985.TheApplicationof LivingSystemsProcessAnalysisinEducation.ISIMonograph85-7.

Berrien,F.K. 1976.A (3eneral

Systems Approach to Organizations.In Handbook of Industrial and

Organizational Psychology, ed.

M. D. Dunnette, 42-43. Chicago:

Rand McNally.

Bolman, W. M. 1967. Theoretical

and Community Bases of

Community Mental Health.

American Journal of Psychiatry 124:7-21.

1970. Systems Theory,

Psychiatry, and School Phobia.

American Journal of Psychiatry 127:65-72.

Bryant, D. D. 1987. A Living

Systems Process Analysis of a

Public Transit System. BehavioralScience 32:293-303.

Burgess, J.; R. H. Nelson; and R.

WaUhaus. 1974. Network Analysisas a Method for the Evaluation

of Service Delivery Systems.

Community Mental Health

Journal 10 (3): 337-345.

Connors, M. M.; A. A. Harrison;

and F. R. Akins. 1985. LivingAloft: Human Requirements for

Extended Spaceflight. NASASP-483.

Cummings, L. L., and T. A.

DeCotiis. 1973. OrganizationalCorrelates of Perceived Stress in a

Professional Organization. Public

Personnel Management 2:277.

Duncan, D. M. 1972. James (3.

Miller's Living Systems Theory:

Issues for Management Thoughtand Practice. Academic

Management Journal 15:513-523.

Hearn, G. 1958. Theory Buildingin Social Work. Toronto: Univ. of

Toronto Press.

Kluger, J. M. 1969. ChildhoodAsthma and the Social Milieu.

Journal of the American Academy

of Child Psychiatry 8:353-366.

Kolouch, F. T. 1970. Hypnosis in

Living Systems Theory: A Living

Systems Autopsy in a Polysurgical,

Polymedical, Polypsychiatric PatientAddicted to Talwin. American

Journal of Clinical Hypnosis 13 (1):22-34.

Lewis, L. F., II. 1981. ConflictingCommands versus Decision Time:

A Cross-Level Experiment.

Behavioral Science 26:79-84.

Lichtman, C. M., and R. (3. Hunt.

1971. Personality and Organization

Theory: A Review of SomeConceptual Literature.

Psychological Bulletin 75:285-287.

257

LockheedMissilesandSpaceCompany.1985.Issues.Vol.4of FinalReport,SpaceStationHumanProductivityStudy,xi-xiv.Sunnyvale,CA: LockheedMissilesandSpaceCompany,Inc.

Merker,S. L. 1982.LivingSystemsasa ManagementTool.Proc.26thAnn.Mtg.Soc.GeneralSystemsResearch,886-888.

1985.LivingSystemsTheory:A FrameworkforManagement.BehavioralScience30:187-194.

1987.LivingSystemsProcessAnalysisof anUrbanHospital.BehavioralScience32:304-314.

Miller,J. (3. 1955. Toward

a General Theory for theBehavioral Sciences. American

Psychologist 10: 513-531.

1965. Living Systems:

Basic Concepts; Living Systems:Structure and Process. Behavioral

Science 10:193-237; 237-379.

1978. Living Systems.

New York: McGraw-Hill.

1986a. Can Systems

Theory Generate Testable

Hypotheses? From Talcott Parsons

to Living Systems Theory. SystemsResearch 3:

73-84.

1986b. A Living

Systems Analysis of a Canada/

U.S. Boundary Region. In Towarda Transboundary Monitoring

Network: A Continuing Binational

Exploration, ed. P. T. Haug, (3. L.Bandurski, and A. L. Hamilton,

vol. I, pp. 132-144. Washington,DC: U.S. State Dept., Int. JointCommission U.S.A. and Canada.

Miller, J. (3., and J. L. Miller.

1980. The Family as a System.

In The Family: Evaluation and

Treatment, ed. C. K. Hofling and

J. M. Lewis, 141-184. New York:Brunner/Mazel.

1983. General Living

Systems Theory and Small

Groups. In Comprehensive GroupPsychotherapy, ed. H. I. Kaplan

and B. J. Sadock, 33-47.Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.

Miller, J. L. 1990. The Timer.Behavioral Science 35:164-196.

258

NationalCommissiononSpace.1986.PioneeringtheSpaceFrontier.NewYork: BantamBooks.

Newbrough,J. R. 1972.CommunityPsychology.American Psychologist 27:770.

Noell, J. J. 1974. On theAdministrative Sector of Social

Systems: An Analysis of the Size

and Complexity of GovernmentBureaucracies in the American

States. Social Forces 52:549-559.

Pierce, L. M. 1972. Usefulness

of a Systems Approach for

Problem Conceptualization

and Investigation. NursingResearch 21:509-517.

Rapoport, A., and W. J. Horvath.

1961. A Study of a Large

Sociogram. Behavioral Science 6:279-291.

Reese, W. G. 1972. An Essayon Administration. American

Journal of Psychiatry 128:69-72.

Reidenbach, R., and T. A. Oliva.

1981. A Framework for Analysis.

Journal of Marketing 45 (4--Fall):42-52.

Rogers, E. M., and R. A. Rogers.1976. Communication in

Organizations, pp. 29-58.New York: Free Press.

Ruscoe, G. C., et al. 1985. The

Application of Living Systems

Theory to 41 U.S. Army Battalions.Behavioral Science 30:1-56.

Social Science Citation Index.

1979 ff..

Swanson, G. A., and J. G. Miller.1989. Measurement and

Interpretation in Accounting.New York: Quorum Books.

Weekes, W. H. 1983. A General

Systems Approach to Management

Accounting. Salinas, CA:

Intersystems Publications.

Weiss, R. S., and M. Rein. 1970.The Evaluation of Broad-Aim

Programs: Experimental Design,Its Difficulties, and an Alternative.

Administrative Science Quarterly 15

(1): 97-109.

259